[Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements

2009-07-15 Thread Christian Vogt

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call
comments you may receive.


Document..:  draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements
Reviewer..:  Christian Vogt
Review date...:  July 15, 2009


Summary:  This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits
  that should be fixed before publication.

This document specifies protocol requirements for MPLS in packet
transport networks.  The document is of very good quality, with an
elaborate introduction explaining the background for this document.

Two editorial nits that the authors should consider addressing prior
to publication of this document are the following:

- The fourth paragraph on page 6, which is part of the introduction,
  already specifies a requirement.  I suggest moving this to section
  2, since this is the section that is dedicated to requirements.

- The first paragraph of section 2 is a duplicate; it already appears in
  the introduction.  I suggest removing it from section 2.  The
  paragraph is important for the reader to understand the scope of the
  document, and hence should retain its prominent position in the
  introduction rather than the position in section 2.

Best regards,
- Christian



On Jul 2, 2009, The IESG wrote:

The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label  
Switching WG

(mpls) to consider the following document:

- 'MPLS-TP Requirements '
   as a Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments to  
the

i...@ietf.org mailing lists by 2009-07-16. Exceptionally,
comments may be sent to i...@ietf.org instead. In either case, please
retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements-09.txt


IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=18021&rfc_flag=0




___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art


Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements

2009-07-16 Thread Adrian Farrel

All,

I propose the following RFC Editor note...

Section 1

OLD
  Although both static and dynamic configuration of MPLS-TP transport
  paths (including Operations, Administration and Maintenance (OAM) and
  protection capabilities) is required by this document, it MUST be
  possible for operators to be able to completely operate (including
  OAM and protection capabilities) an MPLS-TP network in the absence of
  any control plane.
NEW
  MPLS-TP transport paths may be established using static or dynamic
  configuration. It should be noted that the MPLS-TP network and its
  transport paths can always be operated fully (including OAM and
  protection capabilities) in the absence of any control plane.

- - - -

Section 2
OLD
  This document specifies the requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile
  (MPLS-TP).  The requirements are for the behavior of the protocol
  mechanisms and procedures that constitute building blocks out of
  which the MPLS transport profile is constructed.  That is, the
  requirements indicate what features are to be available in the MPLS
  toolkit for use by MPLS-TP.  The requirements in this document do not
  describe what functions an MPLS-TP implementation supports.  The
  purpose of this document is to identify the toolkit and any new
  protocol work that is required.
NEW
  The MPLS-TP requirements set out in this section are for the behavior
  of the protocol mechanisms and procedures that constitute building
  blocks out of which the MPLS transport profile is constructed.
  That is, the requirements indicate what features are to be available
  in the MPLS toolkit for use by MPLS-TP.

- - - -

Please let me know if this is acceptable.

A
- Original Message - 
From: "Christian Vogt" 

To: 
Cc: ; ; 
; "Gen-ART Mailing List" ; 
; 

Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 1:25 AM
Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements



I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call
comments you may receive.


Document..:  draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements
Reviewer..:  Christian Vogt
Review date...:  July 15, 2009


Summary:  This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits
  that should be fixed before publication.

This document specifies protocol requirements for MPLS in packet
transport networks.  The document is of very good quality, with an
elaborate introduction explaining the background for this document.

Two editorial nits that the authors should consider addressing prior
to publication of this document are the following:

- The fourth paragraph on page 6, which is part of the introduction,
  already specifies a requirement.  I suggest moving this to section
  2, since this is the section that is dedicated to requirements.

- The first paragraph of section 2 is a duplicate; it already appears in
  the introduction.  I suggest removing it from section 2.  The
  paragraph is important for the reader to understand the scope of the
  document, and hence should retain its prominent position in the
  introduction rather than the position in section 2.

Best regards,
- Christian



On Jul 2, 2009, The IESG wrote:

The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label  Switching 
WG

(mpls) to consider the following document:

- 'MPLS-TP Requirements '
   as a Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments to  the
i...@ietf.org mailing lists by 2009-07-16. Exceptionally,
comments may be sent to i...@ietf.org instead. In either case, please
retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements-09.txt


IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=18021&rfc_flag=0




___
Ietf mailing list
i...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf




___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art


Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements

2009-07-16 Thread Christian Vogt

Adrian -

Your proposed RFC Editor notes are excellent.  I consider this Gen-ART
review addressed.  Thanks.

- Christian



On Jul 16, 2009, Adrian Farrel wrote:


All,

I propose the following RFC Editor note...

Section 1

OLD
 Although both static and dynamic configuration of MPLS-TP transport
 paths (including Operations, Administration and Maintenance (OAM) and
 protection capabilities) is required by this document, it MUST be
 possible for operators to be able to completely operate (including
 OAM and protection capabilities) an MPLS-TP network in the absence of
 any control plane.
NEW
 MPLS-TP transport paths may be established using static or dynamic
 configuration. It should be noted that the MPLS-TP network and its
 transport paths can always be operated fully (including OAM and
 protection capabilities) in the absence of any control plane.

- - - -

Section 2
OLD
 This document specifies the requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile
 (MPLS-TP).  The requirements are for the behavior of the protocol
 mechanisms and procedures that constitute building blocks out of
 which the MPLS transport profile is constructed.  That is, the
 requirements indicate what features are to be available in the MPLS
 toolkit for use by MPLS-TP.  The requirements in this document do not
 describe what functions an MPLS-TP implementation supports.  The
 purpose of this document is to identify the toolkit and any new
 protocol work that is required.
NEW
 The MPLS-TP requirements set out in this section are for the behavior
 of the protocol mechanisms and procedures that constitute building
 blocks out of which the MPLS transport profile is constructed.
 That is, the requirements indicate what features are to be available
 in the MPLS toolkit for use by MPLS-TP.

- - - -

Please let me know if this is acceptable.

A




___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art


Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements

2009-07-17 Thread Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)
Hi,
I agree with the new texts. Thanks for the proposal.
Best regards,
Nurit

-Original Message-
From: ext Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian.far...@huawei.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 8:21 PM
To: Christian Vogt; benjamin.niven-jenk...@bt.com; Sprecher, Nurit (NSN
- IL/Hod HaSharon); satoshi.u...@ntt.com; bett...@nortel.com;
dbrung...@att.com
Cc: Gen-ART Mailing List; Loa Andersson
Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements

All,

I propose the following RFC Editor note...

Section 1

OLD
   Although both static and dynamic configuration of MPLS-TP transport
   paths (including Operations, Administration and Maintenance (OAM) and
   protection capabilities) is required by this document, it MUST be
   possible for operators to be able to completely operate (including
   OAM and protection capabilities) an MPLS-TP network in the absence of
   any control plane.
NEW
   MPLS-TP transport paths may be established using static or dynamic
   configuration. It should be noted that the MPLS-TP network and its
   transport paths can always be operated fully (including OAM and
   protection capabilities) in the absence of any control plane.

- - - -

Section 2
OLD
   This document specifies the requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile
   (MPLS-TP).  The requirements are for the behavior of the protocol
   mechanisms and procedures that constitute building blocks out of
   which the MPLS transport profile is constructed.  That is, the
   requirements indicate what features are to be available in the MPLS
   toolkit for use by MPLS-TP.  The requirements in this document do not
   describe what functions an MPLS-TP implementation supports.  The
   purpose of this document is to identify the toolkit and any new
   protocol work that is required.
NEW
   The MPLS-TP requirements set out in this section are for the behavior
   of the protocol mechanisms and procedures that constitute building
   blocks out of which the MPLS transport profile is constructed.
   That is, the requirements indicate what features are to be available
   in the MPLS toolkit for use by MPLS-TP.

- - - -

Please let me know if this is acceptable.

A
- Original Message - 
From: "Christian Vogt" 
To: 
Cc: ; ; 
; "Gen-ART Mailing List" ; 
; 
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 1:25 AM
Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements


>I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
> reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
> http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
>
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call
> comments you may receive.
>
>
> Document..:  draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements
> Reviewer..:  Christian Vogt
> Review date...:  July 15, 2009
>
>
> Summary:  This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits
>   that should be fixed before publication.
>
> This document specifies protocol requirements for MPLS in packet
> transport networks.  The document is of very good quality, with an
> elaborate introduction explaining the background for this document.
>
> Two editorial nits that the authors should consider addressing prior
> to publication of this document are the following:
>
> - The fourth paragraph on page 6, which is part of the introduction,
>   already specifies a requirement.  I suggest moving this to section
>   2, since this is the section that is dedicated to requirements.
>
> - The first paragraph of section 2 is a duplicate; it already appears
in
>   the introduction.  I suggest removing it from section 2.  The
>   paragraph is important for the reader to understand the scope of the
>   document, and hence should retain its prominent position in the
>   introduction rather than the position in section 2.
>
> Best regards,
> - Christian
>
>
>
> On Jul 2, 2009, The IESG wrote:
>
>> The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label
Switching 
>> WG
>> (mpls) to consider the following document:
>>
>> - 'MPLS-TP Requirements '
>>as a Proposed Standard
>>
>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>> final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments to
the
>> i...@ietf.org mailing lists by 2009-07-16. Exceptionally,
>> comments may be sent to i...@ietf.org instead. In either case, please
>> retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>
>> The file can be obtained via
>>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements-09.t
xt
>>
>>
>> IESG discussion can be tracked via
>>
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=
18021&rfc_flag=0
>
>
>
> ___
> Ietf mailing list
> i...@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 


___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art